Last weekend, a 1960 1969 Chevrolet pickup Baja racer once owned by Steve McQueen sold for $60,000 at an auction in Santa Monica, California. Given that the truck also had a semi-significant racing history, complete with participation in the first running of the Mexican 1000 and a win at the first off-road race held at Riverside Speedway (with Mickey Thompson as a driver), that was likely a fair price for the truck, regardless of its ownership history. At the same auction, a 1952 Chevrolet 3800 pickup with a custom-built camper shell purchased by McQueen in 1978 (and reportedly driven to the airport by the late actor on his final trip to Mexico for cancer surgery) bid to a price of $70,000, but failed to meet the reserve. Likewise, a 1931 Harley-Davidson VL 74 that McQueen was reportedly restoring bid up to $75,000 without hitting the target price, while a 1971 Husqvarna 400 Cross once in the actor’s stable of bikes bid to $50,000.

Which leads us to the obvious question: What is the real value of celebrity ownership? What kind of price premium would you be willing to pay for a vehicle once owned by (insert celebrity name here)? Are these purchases solid investments, or are they merely attempts to cash in on a celebrity’s fame before it inevitably fades?

Mostly it seems to be about having your live ass where some famous guy’s dead ass used to sit. Sort of life-affirming. When it comes to Steve McQueen’s vehicles, though, since he was a hook, it might be additionally interesting because he presumably knew what he was buying, and bought it for a purpose.

When it comes to celebrity memorabilia, there’s always someone willing to pay much more–JUST for the fact that some star owned it. The tweed jacket of McQueen’s for $924K? Absolutely stupid, in my opinion. There is nothing especially different about the jacket; looks like one you could have found on any dept. store rack, but McQueen wore it in a movie. Im sorry, but Id like 4 wheels and a magnificent pedigree with it for that money!

It seems to me that many of these purchases may be of questionable value as a long term investment simply because the celebrity connection will mean less to those who did not live at the time. Will future generations see premium? I think it’s open for debate.

Since I hold all “celebrities” in equal contempt, the value of celebrity ownership is, to my way of thinking, precisely zero. I would be more interested in the rarity and condition of the car when deciding its worth.

Cars, parts, memorabilia…. whatever you’re talking about, it’s worth exactly what the buyer and seller decide. Nothing more, nothing less. I wouldn’t pay seven figures for a Hemi E-Body convertible, but since there are obviously several people in the world who will, my opinion is irrelevant.

I guess certain celebrities will always have possessions that will garner the big bucks. McQueen and Monroe items certainly seem to get the attention.

I personally don’t get it. I have met various celebrities over the years and they certainly didn’t add to my life in any way.

But, given how ragsheets like Star, Enquirer, People, etc. do very well, I guess it is a natural assumption that those who are starstruck will want a piece of their life and are more than happy to pay though the nose for it.

But now that I think about it, maybe I am starstruck. I have in my possession autographs of the 3 most insightful philosophers of the 20th century.

Ten or more years ago I went to Hershey for the specific reason of buying a car owned by Sylvester Stallone. Not because it was his but because, at the time, I thought it was the most beautiful ’58 Impala I had ever seen: Black, slightly modified and absolutely pristine.

I went with about 22K in my pocket and was outbid ON THE FIRST BID. Didn’t even get a chance to raise my number! Forget what it sold for but it was at least 3x it’s value.

As I said in the last go ’round on this subject when McQueens jacket had not yet been sold: Stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

And to open this can of worms even more: Any given object is not “worth” what some idiot will pay for it.

I really do not see the premiums for celebrity stuff, but obviously there are people who do. I really was amazed at the value placed on Steve McQueen’s memorabilia. Given past auctions I was surprised the Baja truck did not go for more.

From an investment point of view, I think one has to be very careful. With the exception of super stars like Elvis and Marilyn Monroe any chance for profit would probably be in the short term (1 to 5 years). Younger generations will have their own stars unless of course a revival brings the old star back in the spot light.